Cruz calls Rubio "an unusually good liar"

The Washington Times ^ | December 21, 2015 | Ted Constantine

[TBP]

“Senator Rubio looks in the TV cameras and says things he knows are absolutely false.”

[House Atreides]

I very strongly believe that Ted Cruz is not eligible to serve as President of the United States. It wouldn’t matter what ticket he was on.
********************************************************************************
Yes, you said that before. Possibly you’ll be able to vote for the Losertarian candidate for president or the Green Party’s candidate if they have one.

[Duchess47]

Well, I doubt the Green Party candidate :)

[House Atreides]

Well, I doubt the Green Party candidate :)
****************************************************
I’d be surprised if they even had one this year (Yeah - I can finally say ‘this year’) ... either Shrillary or Bernie would be quite acceptable to them.

[tennmountainman]

Some good points. I like both Trump and Cruz.
I have recently leaned more toward Trump.
Not because he is a great conservative, like Cruz,
But because I believe he would have the strongest mandate
to change things. Or at least try to change things in DC.
I am fully aware of his past.
It is my belief a Trump Presidency would carry a mandate,
the likes of which this country has never seen.
I could and would vote for Cruz if he is our nominee.

[PowerPro]

Most of them haven’t. They just blindly parrot what they’ve heard/read elsewhere.

[jaydee770]

“...The fact that DOD hires non Americans needs to be exposed, I think most Americans would be appalled...”

The fact that the DOD has *legal* immigrants should not be appalling to *anyone* who understands the valuable contributions they make. I’d like to stand you up before an auditorium full of war-fighters and let you tell them that you are *appalled* that they rely on the work of some of those legal immigrants. You’d be lucky to be merely laughed off the stage and deservedly so!

Your opinion is duly noted. I will henceforth *safely* ignore it as the rantings of someone who lacks a clear understanding of reality.

[central_va]

The fact that we give clearances to non Americans is appalling.

[Godebert]

It is treason upon the Constitution and the Framers command that for the sake of the national security of the republic, for persons born after the adoption of the Constitution, no person except a natural born citizen is to be eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of the Military, to interpret the natural born citizen clause out of the Constitution and replace it with how we may today define under the positive laws of the Fourteenth Amendment or naturalization Acts of Congress a citizen of the United States at birth, a person who, if not also a natural born citizen, is not born with sole allegiance to the United States.

With these principles to guide us, we can only conclude that de facto President Barack Obama, Senator Ted Cruz, Senator Marco Rubio, and Governor Bobby Jindal are all not natural born citizens. None of them were born in the United States to parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of their childrens birth.

Obama, assuming he was born in the United States, is a citizen of the United States at birth, but only by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment. He is not and cannot be a natural born citizen under the common law because while he was presumably born in the United States to a U.S. citizen mother, he was born to a non-U.S. citizen father.

Cruz was born in Canada, presumably to a U.S. citizen mother and a non-U.S. citizen father. He can be a citizen of the United States at birth, but only by virtue of a naturalization Act of Congress (section 301(a)(7) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952). He is not and cannot be a natural born citizen under the common law because, while he was born to a U.S. citizen mother, he was not born in the United States and he was born to a non-U.S. citizen father.

Rubio and Jindal were born in the United States to two non-U.S. citizen parents. They are both citizens of the United States at birth, but only by virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment. They are not and cannot be natural born citizens under the common law because, while they were born in the United States, they were born to two non-U.S. citizen parents.

A Citizen is One Thing, But a Natural Born Citizen is Another

[SmokingJoe]

Let me see.... Do I take your word for it, or do I take the word of the Harvard Law Review here:
harvardlawreview.org/2015/03/on-the-meaning-of-natural-born-citizen

And the overwhelming bipartisan legal opinion here:
m.townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2015/03/23/yes-ted-cruz-is-constitutionally-eligible-to-be-president-n1974967

Give it up, dude.

[Godebert]

The authors argument suffers from the fallacy of bald assertion. They provide no convincing evidence for their position on who is included as an Article II natural born citizen. They do not examine what was the source of the Framers definition of an Article II natural born citizen, let alone what was the definition of a natural born citizen when the Framers drafted and adopted the Constitution and when it was eventually ratified. They ignore so much of the historical and legal record in coming to their bald conclusions. For a discussion of this historical and legal evidence, see:

A Response to Neil Katyal and Paul Clement on the Meaning of a Natural Born Citizen

[Godebert]

The Guy Benson article at townhall.com basically relies on the ridiculous fallacy that the 14th Amendment confers status to anyone born in the country regardless of circumstance.

In defining what an Article II “natural born Citizen” is, we do not seek to read into the Constitution that which was not intended and written there by the Framers. Despite popular belief, the Fourteenth Amendment does not convey the status of “natural born Citizen” in its text nor in its intent. Some add an implication to the actual wording of the Fourteenth Amendment by equating the amendment’s “citizen” to Article II’s “natural born Citizen.” But nowhere does the 14th Amendment confer “natural born citizen” status. The words simply do not appear there, but some would have us believe they are implied. But the wording of the Amendment is clear in showing that it confers citizenship only and nothing more.

Neither the 14th Amendment nor Wong Kim Ark make one a Natural Born Citizen

[Duchess47]

Thank you.

[SmokingJoe]

The article at Towwnhal quotes from several top flight legal scholars and authoritative sources both left and right.
Also there the Harvard Law review piece so linked to which is unequivocal, Ted Cruz I'd qualified to be president.
You wanna try again sport?

[Godebert]

You said that already.

[Godebert]

Note the reference to Natural Law in the first sentence of our Declaration of Independence.

It is crystal clear that the Founding Fathers used the Natural Law definition of 'natural born Citizen' when they wrote Article II. By invoking "The Laws of Nature and Nature's God" the 56 signers of the Declaration incorporated a legal standard of freedom into the forms of government that would follow.

President John Quincy Adams, writing in 1839, looked back at the founding period and recognized the true meaning of the Declaration's reliance on the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." He observed that the American people's "charter was the Declaration of Independence. Their rights, the natural rights of mankind. Their government, such as should be instituted by the people, under the solemn mutual pledges of perpetual union, founded on the self-evident truth's proclaimed in the Declaration."

The Constitution, Vattel, and “Natural Born Citizen”: What Our Framers Knew

The Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

MINOR V. HAPPERSETT IS BINDING PRECEDENT AS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEFINITION OF A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Citizenship Terms Used in the U.S. Constitution - The 5 Terms Defined & Some Legal Reference to Same

"The citizenship of no man could be previous to the declaration of independence, and, as a natural right, belongs to none but those who have been born of citizens since the 4th of July, 1776."....David Ramsay, 1789.

A Dissertation on Manner of Acquiring Character & Privileges of Citizen of U.S.-by David Ramsay-1789

The Law of Nations or the Principles of Natural Law (1758)

The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God: The True Foundation of American Law

Publications of the Colonial Society of Massachusetts, Volume 20 - Use of The Law of Nations by the Constitutional Convention

[caww]

Well I have heard that as well.....but the abuse is there none the less.....and more than companies will certainly admit. The idea is as long as we are importing workers the companies need to be abiding by the rules of hire....they aren’t.

[dp0622]

Ted’s a good man. The insults hurled at him are pathetic.

everyone waited for a real conservative for years, now they can only insult him.

Trump is a good man too. He has more class towards Ted than most of his followers.

[dp0622]

three marriages are a truth for Trump.

no kidding. I don’t care. I like him and that’s his business.

but it would have mattered once here to some who don’t care about I now.

we know what Clinton is.

it has NEVER hurt him before and it wont now.

[dp0622]

have you guys missed what Cruz has been saying for a long time now?

just wow.

[dp0622]

it’s disgusting and heartbreaking.

like schoolyard nonsense when we’re fighting for the future of our country.

two good me. a bunch of nonsense between supporters.

they get along fine. and their supporters don’t. I’ve never heard of that before.